PICS above the law?

[knight0334]

Originally Posted by pex

Isn't that transparency of government that should be available to all people?

I have to agree with Gunlawyer, having such access is a bad thing.

My privacy is more important to me than than a more reliable "system". The challenge process works for unjust denials, we just need to make sure they flag only the proper things and get a little better at not identifying you as someone that is prohibited.

I dont need other people seeing my records, non-convictions, and other non-prohibiting offenses.

[Dredly]

If everyone / everything else is above the law and guilt is proven after the fact then why would PICS be any different?

If you are arrested for anything, be it correct or incorrect you'll most likely spend several hours in prison before you have a chance to defend yourself... then its "freedom for the privileged" as you have to come up with the funds to pay to be let out of prison, if you can't pay you get to enjoy your stay on the state.

[kwmpa]

There could be a checks and balaces system built in if you have instore computer system. Say you have someone wanting to buy a gun you should have to list the serial number of the gun in the system. Then if its denied the state has a record of him being denied with a particular gun. There could also be officers who go around and check on stuff like that create more jobs.

My whole problem with the deal is this. They place you into research and dont tell you the reasoning. If they did then there would have been an easy way to clear it up. In my situation i could have all the court documents to them in a matter of minutes. On top of all that they shouldnt have any record to begin with. I was reading the court order sent to all the agencies today it specifically states that all records are to be sent back to my county and destroyed and all files be removed from the computer system including arrest records within 30 days. And i know for a fact it was sent to the PSP 6months ago. So someone dropped a ball someplace. This is where civil rights come into play. And exactly why we are looking into legal action against the PSP. Someone has to step up and make it as public as possible.

Then there is a 15 day waiting period. Some of us drive over an hour sometimes two or three to use a particular gun dealer and then we got to go back. Who is paying the $150 added expense to go back there. Or if youre like me and do pipeline work I might only be in the state a week and then i can be anywhere in the country after that. I have to go to Texas for three months so what do i do about getting my gun then? Im not going to fly back just to pick it up. The dealer i use is a friend and i know he would probably let my dad pick it up but im sure he would clear it through the proper channels first. The system is flawed in that respect that it doesnt take in account all those things.

[Robert Kayland]

I agree with the school of thought that favors the privacy of the PICS... my only point is, if they can check things out for themselves on their own computer systems, then they should, rather than making the citizen jump through hoops.

For example, if there's an incident that occurred in PA, they can easily check their own PATCH system and see what the result is (assuming it isn't a recent incident). I don't know if they have the same access to national criminal check systems, but I have to assume they do... so instead of merely looking at arrest incidents, they should also be looking at criminal background checks based upon court records, and the court records should trump any other systems.

So in the case of my archer friend, when they saw his arrest incident which occurred some 40+ years prior when he was 14, instead of making him prove the disposition of the arrest, they could have easily gone to their own PATCH system and seen that he had a clean criminal record.

I know that no system can be perfect, and inconveniences are no great shakes in the grand scheme of things... I just don't like the idea that certain data items don't truly get expunged from all systems, even when you've gone through the trouble of expungement... and then Big Brother can make you explain yourself to his satisfaction... even when he has the wherewithal to do the computer legwork himself, and in a much quicker and easier manner than the citizen who is forced to track down county courthouse files and/or hire lawyers.

[kwmpa]

yeah after all the trouble you go through to do stuff for the state and get your record expunged not to mention the lawyer fees involved which if you have had to pay for a lawyer are crazy it still means nothing. while i know they set it up to keep guns out of the wrong hands i think that they take it to far i certain cases. it just goes to prove that in the eyes of the PSP if you have been arrested you shouldnt have any rights.

[JLBIII]

Originally Posted by kwmpa

There could be a checks and balaces system built in if you have instore computer system. Say you have someone wanting to buy a gun you should have to list the serial number of the gun in the system. Then if its denied the state has a record of him being denied with a particular gun.

The firearms you are going to purchase are listed on Form 4473 before the call to PICS is made, so there is a record of them if needed by PICS or PSP.

JB

[pex]

Originally Posted by knight0334

I have to agree with Gunlawyer, having such access is a bad thing.

My privacy is more important to me than than a more reliable "system". The challenge process works for unjust denials, we just need to make sure they flag only the proper things and get a little better at not identifying you as someone that is prohibited.

I dont need other people seeing my records, non-convictions, and other non-prohibiting offenses.

But that's not what GunLawyer said the reason was for not letting people see their PSP extra-'sensitive' information. He said he didn't want them to use the truth to work the system.

That's a bad mention but not directly as it relates to the PICS/extra-information idea. Don't you think that YOU should be able to read up on YOUR OWN extra-'sensitive' information? (i.e. how exactly will we ever know what the government is doing...we certainly don't trust it)

And because we'd want to know about ourselves, it only follows that the prohibited would know about their 'secret prohibitors' or how the flow of information would 'somehow' allow them to play FFLs.

What it all arrives back to is that faltering toward 'safety' is simply not acceptable.

[kwmpa]

they are still going to do whatever they want....thats the fact they have the power and we dont so we are always going to have to answer to someone the sad part is that its only going to get harder to buy a gun

[pex]

Originally Posted by kwmpa

they are still going to do whatever they want....thats the fact they have the power and we dont so we are always going to have to answer to someone the sad part is that its only going to get harder to buy a gun

We have the power to think, to vote, and to shoot. It would be helpful to try any of those, and maybe all of them in that order.

[Robert Kayland]

I dont need other people seeing my records, non-convictions, and other non-prohibiting offenses.

I agree as to wanting privacy... what I don't agree to is...

Why is a system for checking gun prohibitions allowed to carry "private" information about "incidents" that relate to non-charges, non-convictions and/or non-prohibiting offenses in the first place?

And worse yet, why is some bureaucrat allowed to use that information to deny you your rights until you've satisfactorily danced to his/her tune?

/Riddle me that, Caped Crusaders!